Dismissed
Mulayam v. State of U.P. and Another
Allahabad HCBAIL/28124/2019
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No.…
What the court decided
AI extract
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No.…
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 84
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 28124 of 2019
Applicant :- Mulayam Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Santosh Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in case crime No. 184 of 2018, under Sections 376, 313 IPC and 3/4 of POCSO Act, P.S. Lalauli, District Fatehpur with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.
It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case and that he was not involved in any such incident. It was submitted that victim girl has also made allegations against one Anshu in her statement recorded under Sections 161 & 164 Cr.P.C. and that allegations of kidnapping were also made against said Anshu but alleged Anshu was not charge-sheeted by the police and that during trial also, victim girl has made allegations against said Anshu. It was submitted that now the applicant is languishing in jail since 23.07.2018, having no criminal history and that in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and cooperate in the trial.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail and argued that in her statement under Section 161 as well as under Section 164 Cr.P.C., victim girl has made allegations of rape against the applicant and that as per school leaving certificate, age of victim girl is 15 years. It was further submitted that trial of case
is in progress and two witnesses have already been examined. It was submitted that merely because police have not chargesheeted alleged Anshu Yadav, it would not lessen the liability of applicant.
Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, nature of allegations, gravity of offence, age of prosecutrix, stage of trial and all attending facts and circumstances of case, the Court is of the opinion that it is not a fit case for bail. Hence, the bail application of applicant Mulayam is hereby rejected.
However, keeping in view period of incarnation of applicant, learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial and to decide the same as early as possible.
Order Date :- 16.12.2019 A. Tripathi
Mulayam
State of U.P.
Raj Beer Singh
A. Tripathi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court